From: martijn (groupstudy@martijnj.nl)
Date: Tue Jul 31 2007 - 06:20:51 ART
Lim,
i needed to laugh a little at first. Never tried.
Not THE answer, I think you need to test.
let's break up your q's.
> done before?
No.
> Can a host on VLAN359 now communicate with a host on VLAN360?
After i read your post trice, i see you want to do it @ one switch. when i
want to do comms with an host it starts with ip, if that is not local
(logical AND) I go for the default gateway. Do your pc's have
one?????????????
When I look to your Q form another angle, say mac-addr table, (never tested,
group?) I would say mac-addr binding goes to direct connected prot first,
after that I assume that the link would for a L2 link between vlan's. Any
takes?
martijn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Toh Soon, Lim" <tohsoon28@gmail.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 9:43 AM
Subject: Bridging VLANs by looping cable
> Hi All,
>
> This may sound simple and mundane but for curiosity sake, I need to seek
> clarification.
>
> Has anyone tried "bridging" two VLANs by looping a cable to the same
> switch?
> E.g. in the following diagram:
>
> Gi0/1(VLAN359)----
> |
> |
> Gi0/2(VLAN360)----
>
> The same cable connects to interfaces Gi0/1 (VLAN359) and Gi0/2 (VLAN360).
> Can a host on VLAN359 now communicate with a host on VLAN360?
>
> What's the implication doing this, e.g. from STP point of view? Is it
> recommended at all?
>
> Any advice is appreciated.
>
>
> Thank you.
>
> B.Rgds,
> Lim TS
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:42 ART